Skip to content

NFL moving to 17 game season

The Browns Board
34 12 1.2k
  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #17

    I understand how the match ups come up but I haven’t seen how it’s decided who’s at home ?

  • @the-gipper said:

    Probably cut it down to  2.....and most 3,  but not all.    They still make big money from those and  they do have some use in separating the wheat from the Chaff. 

    The money they lose from those meaningless games will be partially subsidized by the one extra real game..... and I don't think a single NFL owner is relying on a stimulus check to meet payroll. 

    Any good coaching staff can get down to 53 without a single pre-season game, especially given the practice squad.

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players, while the 17th game is for the fans.   

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #18

    @d-bone said:

    The money they lose from those meaningless games will be partially subsidized by the one extra real game..... and I don't think a single NFL owner is relying on a stimulus check to meet payroll. 

    Any good coaching staff can get down to 53 without a single pre-season game, especially given the practice squad.

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players, while the 17th game is for the fans.   

    Yes,  the  17th game is for the owners pocketbooks....though clearly the players will benefit monetarily as well.   And the preseason games are also for the owners pocketbooks,  but I do think that  most GMs/coaches want  a couple of live games to do some evaluations.  They COULD do without,  but they much prefer to have those  games that don't count

  • Field Yates@FieldYates
    Using the formula reported by @peter_king (profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/02/28/nfl…), here are the expected matchups for the NFL's 17th game for each team in 2021.
    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #19
  • L LondonBrown wrote on last edited by
    #20

    Ah of course, be NFC next year

  • @the-gipper said:

    Probably cut it down to  2.....and most 3,  but not all.    They still make big money from those and  they do have some use in separating the wheat from the Chaff. 

    The money they lose from those meaningless games will be partially subsidized by the one extra real game..... and I don't think a single NFL owner is relying on a stimulus check to meet payroll. 

    Any good coaching staff can get down to 53 without a single pre-season game, especially given the practice squad.

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players, while the 17th game is for the fans.   

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #21

    @d-bone said:

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

  • @d-bone said:

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by D Bone
    #22

    @tour2ma said:

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    I would argue that far more players have made the team in practice. Sure a big play in a game wows the media, who then pumps it out to the fans, but any competent coaching staff has seen glimpses of that before in camp. 

    While the games are lightly attended, they are still televised on local affiliates and the owners are still getting paid. The only positive I see regarding pre-season games is it does employ a lot of people that live pay check to pay check. (parking, security, vendors, etc..) 

    Never have been and never will be a pre-season fan. 

  • T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by TexasAg1969
    #23

    Alabama or OSU will be added to each team's schedule to see who is really NFL or just a pretend team there for the $$$ only.?

  • @d-bone said:

    The pre-season games are for the owners and not the players

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    S SdBacker80 wrote on last edited by
    #24

    @tour2ma said:

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    Agree and the next move is probably expansion. That’s a money grab too and Hopefully it isn’t 20 games. 
     

    2,3,4 preseason games your stars and significant role players aren’t playing a lot.  It is for the depth guys and rookies.  Do we need 4 games to figure out depth with scrimmages and practices factored in too

  • @tour2ma said:

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    Agree and the next move is probably expansion. That’s a money grab too and Hopefully it isn’t 20 games. 
     

    2,3,4 preseason games your stars and significant role players aren’t playing a lot.  It is for the depth guys and rookies.  Do we need 4 games to figure out depth with scrimmages and practices factored in too

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #25

    @sdbacker80 said:

    Agree and the next move is probably expansion. That’s a money grab too and Hopefully it isn’t 20 games. 
     

    2,3,4 preseason games your stars and significant role players aren’t playing a lot.  It is for the depth guys and rookies.  Do we need 4 games to figure out depth with scrimmages and practices factored in too

    By expansion, if you mean more teams....that is not happening any time soon.   These owners do not want to  share any more of the money pie.    If by that you mean expansion to  18 games....that IS what the owners have wanted to do all along,  but to do that they would need to get the PA to agree, and so far, no dice on that,  but I do expect it to happen some day. 

  • @tour2ma said:

    Disagree...

    Many a player has earned a roster spot by getting noticed in preseason, whereas the owners make less since the games are so lightly attended. With vets playing less than ever this is truer than ever.

    Converting one preseason game to one that counts is a terrible precedent to set.

    I would argue that far more players have made the team in practice. Sure a big play in a game wows the media, who then pumps it out to the fans, but any competent coaching staff has seen glimpses of that before in camp. 

    While the games are lightly attended, they are still televised on local affiliates and the owners are still getting paid. The only positive I see regarding pre-season games is it does employ a lot of people that live pay check to pay check. (parking, security, vendors, etc..) 

    Never have been and never will be a pre-season fan. 

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #26

    @d-bone said:

    1. I would argue that far more players have made the team in practice. Sure a big play in a game wows the media, who then pumps it out to the fans, but any competent coaching staff has seen glimpses of that before in camp. 
    2. While the games are lightly attended, they are still televised on local affiliates and the owners are still getting paid. The only positive I see regarding pre-season games is it does employ a lot of people that live pay check to pay check. (parking, security, vendors, etc..) 
    3. Never have been and never will be a pre-season fan. 
    1. "A big play" can't win a spot, but 20 minutes of solid tape can. The bottom 10 of a 90-man roster may not see 20 minutes of scrimmage time in a week of practice... and STs, the best hope of the bottom 10, see very little, full-go, practice time.
    2. Not "paid"... just receiving income. You ran a business... you should understand a balance sheet. (more below) As for employees... fewer work preseason games.
    3. Me neither as is the case with 80-90% of NFL fans. It's why they are so lightly attended... and light attendance means reduced income, even if Preseason games are included in season ticket packages.

    Teams, except one, don't release financial data because they are private corporations. The one exception is the publicly owned Packers... and thru them and some public league revenue sharing data we get a peek.

    • TV and licensing revenue send around $300mm to each team... save da Boyz, who have their own, separate merchandise deals.
    • This was about 60% of GB's income the remainder of which is from local sources, i.e., ticket sales, concessions, and local sponsors.
    • GB's 2020 gross income total was $507mm.
    • GB's gross expenses were $437mm for a net profit before taxes of $70mm ($35mm after taxes).

    Swap one preseason game attended by 10k to a "real game" attended by 65k and for every $20 spent on concessions (the average NFL fan spend) that's $1.1mm of free money flowing to the bottom line. Nothing to sneeze at...

  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #27

    Yes,  certainly it is a fact that  NFL teams do not make  as much money on preseason games as they do on regular season games.....but they still make a significant amount of money  which is why they want to keep at least a couple.

    Does anyone remember when  NFL teams were not quite so greedy about their preseason game?     They used to play them in neutral cities,  or they would have special events:

    Remember the  preseason  Doubleheaders at  Muni Stadium?    Remember that the Browns used to play a preseason game at the Rubber Bowl?   The Giants had played a game at the Syracuse Carrier Dome.   The Packers had games at  Camp Randall Stadium in  Madison Wisc.     The Packers also played a game in Winnipeg, and the Bills played in Toronto.   I believe the Cowboys may have played some games in San Antonio.   

    And, of course, there is the special Hall of Fame Game in Canton,  but that game is an extra preseason game for the teams selected to play in it.  

    The last time the Browns played in it was  in 1999.    I am not sure why  the Browns have not played in it since.    Given its proximity to Cleveland you would think they would want the local team in there,  but, perhaps, that is precisely why they haven't  been in since.  Besides  1999, the Browns were in the HOF game in:  1990, 1981, 1967,  1963

  • @d-bone said:

    1. I would argue that far more players have made the team in practice. Sure a big play in a game wows the media, who then pumps it out to the fans, but any competent coaching staff has seen glimpses of that before in camp. 
    2. While the games are lightly attended, they are still televised on local affiliates and the owners are still getting paid. The only positive I see regarding pre-season games is it does employ a lot of people that live pay check to pay check. (parking, security, vendors, etc..) 
    3. Never have been and never will be a pre-season fan. 
    1. "A big play" can't win a spot, but 20 minutes of solid tape can. The bottom 10 of a 90-man roster may not see 20 minutes of scrimmage time in a week of practice... and STs, the best hope of the bottom 10, see very little, full-go, practice time.
    2. Not "paid"... just receiving income. You ran a business... you should understand a balance sheet. (more below) As for employees... fewer work preseason games.
    3. Me neither as is the case with 80-90% of NFL fans. It's why they are so lightly attended... and light attendance means reduced income, even if Preseason games are included in season ticket packages.

    Teams, except one, don't release financial data because they are private corporations. The one exception is the publicly owned Packers... and thru them and some public league revenue sharing data we get a peek.

    • TV and licensing revenue send around $300mm to each team... save da Boyz, who have their own, separate merchandise deals.
    • This was about 60% of GB's income the remainder of which is from local sources, i.e., ticket sales, concessions, and local sponsors.
    • GB's 2020 gross income total was $507mm.
    • GB's gross expenses were $437mm for a net profit before taxes of $70mm ($35mm after taxes).

    Swap one preseason game attended by 10k to a "real game" attended by 65k and for every $20 spent on concessions (the average NFL fan spend) that's $1.1mm of free money flowing to the bottom line. Nothing to sneeze at...

    D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by D Bone
    #28

    @tour2ma said:

    1. "A big play" can't win a spot, but 20 minutes of solid tape can. The bottom 10 of a 90-man roster may not see 20 minutes of scrimmage time in a week of practice... and STs, the best hope of the bottom 10, see very little, full-go, practice time.
    2. Not "paid"... just receiving income. You ran a business... you should understand a balance sheet. (more below) As for employees... fewer work preseason games.
    3. Me neither as is the case with 80-90% of NFL fans. It's why they are so lightly attended... and light attendance means reduced income, even if Preseason games are included in season ticket packages.

    Teams, except one, don't release financial data because they are private corporations. The one exception is the publicly owned Packers... and thru them and some public league revenue sharing data we get a peek.

    • TV and licensing revenue send around $300mm to each team... save da Boyz, who have their own, separate merchandise deals.
    • This was about 60% of GB's income the remainder of which is from local sources, i.e., ticket sales, concessions, and local sponsors.
    • GB's 2020 gross income total was $507mm.
    • GB's gross expenses were $437mm for a net profit before taxes of $70mm ($35mm after taxes).

    Swap one preseason game attended by 10k to a "real game" attended by 65k and for every $20 spent on concessions (the average NFL fan spend) that's $1.1mm of free money flowing to the bottom line. Nothing to sneeze at...

    I don't disagree with any of that, and I know it's what has always been done.

    To reiterate, my original comment was "I will like a 17 game schedule if they cut out all pre-season games."

    Just because it's what has always been done before, doesn't mean it's not what needs to be done now or in the future, and to believe there is no way a team could possibly be built without pre-season games is just untrue..... I see you there 2020 NFL season and all NCAA seasons. 

    Add the extra real game. Scrub all pre-season games. Increase the roster to 55, increase the practice squad by 3 and tweak some of the rules regarding the practice squad to help insure that if a team somehow does miss on a hidden gem of a player, he is still their property for the 1st 6 weeks of every season..... it's not really that hard.

    As for the owners losing revenue? Cry me a river. Maybe they will have to order water with dinner once - or God forbid even twice, instead of that bottle of Dom Perignon, but something tells me the billionaires club will be juuuuust fine.?  

  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #29

    The  17 game season has been basically written in stone for a year now.  

    The only new news is that we now know that the  17th game will be a home game against the Arizona  Cardinals,  pitting the two Sooner Heisman winners against each other. 

    But we don't have any dates yet. 

  • AxeA Axe wrote on last edited by
    #30

    17 is fine with me if we lose the almost pointless 4th preseason game to be replaced by the almost pointless 3rd preseason game 😉

  • AxeA Axe

    17 is fine with me if we lose the almost pointless 4th preseason game to be replaced by the almost pointless 3rd preseason game 😉

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #31

    @axe said:

    17 is fine with me if we lose the almost pointless 4th preseason game to be replaced by the almost pointless 3rd preseason game 😉

    We are losing the 4th preseason game...which is being replace by the 17th regular season game.   And we will now have  3 preseason games.  But how do you get it that  the 3rd game "replaces"   the 4th game?  

  • @axe said:

    17 is fine with me if we lose the almost pointless 4th preseason game to be replaced by the almost pointless 3rd preseason game 😉

    We are losing the 4th preseason game...which is being replace by the 17th regular season game.   And we will now have  3 preseason games.  But how do you get it that  the 3rd game "replaces"   the 4th game?  

    D BoneD D Bone wrote on last edited by D Bone
    #32

    @the-gipper said:

    But how do you get it that  the 3rd game "replaces"  the 4th game?  

    I'm guessing he meant that since the 3rd game was always considered a "dress rehearsal" where the starters played the most, now that will change to the 2nd game since the coaches will want to rest the starters a full week before the opener, making the 3rd game the useless one... all to which I agree with him. 

  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #33

    So?  What the fuck IS going on with the schedule this year.   They have known they are going to go to 17 games since like a year ago.   Usually the schedule is released around  April 15,   which was like  2 weeks ago almost.

    ::::::

    OK, after checking, I am seeing this:   May  12 is the release date.   Almost a month later than usual:

    https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-regular-season-schedule-to-be-released-may-12-on-nfl-network-nfl-com#:~:text=Around the NFL-,2021 NFL regular-season schedule to be released May,on NFL Network%2C NFL.com

  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #34

    2021

    Here is schedule without dates:  

    With Covid waning  except among the young or the stupid who refuse to be vaccinated  it is expected that we may have full stadiums this year.  

    I assume that also means we can also hold our  annual Browns Board Tailgate.   The issue there is can our out of country compadres make it here.

    I have made a couple of road tailgates in the past.  It may be slightly  possible this year,  depending on timing.  I am going to be in  Connecticut for a week.  I will be staying less than  100 miles from Foxboro Mass.   If they scheduled the Browns there  for like either  Sept.  26 or  Oct.  3rd  I could possibly get there....if a  group were to go there for a tailgate.     Alternately,   I have a week in SFO  from Thurs.  Nov. 18 to Thurs Nov.  25.   I had planned to head north of SFO for the week prior.......but,  if  the  Chargers game were to be scheduled  around that time,  I could go south to LA rather than north.   Again, that is IF  a group here were thinking about heading out that way.  But, we have over  2 weeks to wait to see that schedule.